Brain, Body & Wellbeing Science

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band A.

I name fewer than three body signals, or I name three signals but cannot say what any of them indicate about how I feel.

I name three body signals but only link one or two to what they indicate, or one of my links is generic ('I feel bad').

I can name at least three body signals and what each typically indicates about how I feel.

I name a fourth body signal that I have noticed in myself and say what I think it means for me.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band A.

I say sleep and food are important but not what they do for the body and brain, or I repeat a phrase I was taught without reworking it into my own words.

I describe what sleep or food does in my own words but cover only one of the two, or my description of the brain stops at 'helps me think.'

I can describe in my own words what sleep and food do for the body and brain.

I name something sleep or food does that is less commonly discussed (e.g. sleep helps memory, food affects mood) beyond the basic functions.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band B.

I name fight, flight, or freeze but do not describe what happens in the body, or I mix up the three responses.

I describe what happens in the body during one of the three responses, but the other two are described generically or are interchangeable in my explanation.

I can explain in a written or oral task what happens in the body during a fight, flight, or freeze response.

I explain why a body might choose one of the three responses over the others depending on the situation.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band B.

I name the three parts of the habit loop but use an example from the lesson rather than my own, or my own example does not actually fit the loop.

I give my own example but one part of the loop is described generically, or the three parts do not connect smoothly in the example.

I can explain the three parts of the habit loop using my own example.

I notice and name a part of my own habit loop I could actually change to change the habit, and say which part.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band C.

I name the amygdala or prefrontal cortex but do not explain how they interact, or I describe them as acting separately.

I explain how they interact, but the explanation is one-directional (amygdala overrides prefrontal cortex) and misses how the prefrontal cortex influences the amygdala.

I can explain in a written task how the amygdala and prefrontal cortex interact during a stressful moment.

I explain the interaction and describe what the same interaction would look like in someone who has practised regulation over time.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band C.

I give a definition of neuroplasticity but no example, or an example that is about learning in general rather than about the brain rewiring.

I give a concrete example, but I do not link it clearly to the mechanism of neuroplasticity, so the example illustrates effort rather than rewiring.

I can explain neuroplasticity in my own words with a concrete example of how it applies.

My example covers both how neuroplasticity supports change and why change takes time in spite of neuroplasticity.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band C.

I describe what a habit loop is but not how it explains behaviour change, or I describe change at the level of effort rather than cue–routine–reward.

I describe the mechanism but only for habit formation, not for habit change, or I skip the role of reward in changing a habit.

I can describe how the habit loop explains behaviour change at the level of mechanism.

I describe the mechanism and name one case where changing the cue or reward is easier than changing the routine.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band D.

My explanation uses neuroscience vocabulary but describes stress, emotion, attention, and habit as a list rather than showing how they interact.

I describe interactions between two of the four (e.g. stress and attention) but not the full system, or I use accurate vocabulary inconsistently.

I can use accurate neuroscience vocabulary in a written explanation to describe how stress, emotion, attention, and habit interact as a system.

I use accurate vocabulary to describe the system and name a feedback loop where one element reinforces another in a way that matters for wellbeing.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band D.

I name the HPA axis but cannot describe the sequence, or I describe a stress response without reference to the HPA axis structure.

I describe the HPA axis in a stress response, but my description is limited to an acute response and does not distinguish acute from chronic activation.

I can describe the role of the HPA axis in the stress response.

I describe the HPA axis in the stress response and one specific downstream effect that matters for long-term wellbeing.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band E.

I describe what the intervention is but not the proposed mechanism by which it would change the stress-emotion-attention-habit system.

I state a mechanism in general terms ('it reduces stress') without specifying how it changes a physiological or psychological step.

I can explain the proposed mechanism of a specific wellbeing intervention (mindfulness, exercise, breathwork, sleep-hygiene, or similar).

I explain the proposed mechanism with specific reference to a physiological or psychological pathway (for example, HPA axis, sleep architecture, reward circuitry) and name which step of the pathway the intervention acts on.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band E.

I state the intervention 'works' or 'doesn't work' without citing any evidence.

I cite evidence but I rely on a single study or anecdote without considering whether the finding generalises.

I can summarise what the evidence suggests about the effectiveness of a specific wellbeing intervention.

I summarise a body of evidence — including where effects are consistent, where they vary by population, and where claims run ahead of the evidence.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band E.

I claim the intervention changes everything or nothing, rather than articulating which elements of the system it would affect.

I name one element the intervention would change but I ignore elements it would leave untouched.

I can articulate what the intervention would and would not change in the stress-emotion-attention-habit system.

I articulate specifically which elements of stress, emotion, attention, and habit the intervention targets and which it leaves unchanged, and I explain why the targeted elements matter for the outcome claimed.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band F.

I assert the evidence is 'strong' without pointing to specific studies or features of the evidence base.

I point to one line of evidence and treat it as decisive, without considering replication or converging lines.

I can identify where the evidence is strong on a contested claim in wellbeing science.

I identify the strongest parts of the evidence base and explain what makes them strong (replication, effect size, convergent methods) rather than just citing them.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band F.

I treat the evidence as settled on all fronts and acknowledge no uncertainty.

I name general uncertainty but do not locate specific claims that remain uncertain or explain why.

I can identify where the evidence is uncertain on a contested claim in wellbeing science.

I identify specific claims that remain uncertain, distinguish uncertainty due to thin evidence from uncertainty due to conflicting evidence, and explain which studies would need to change my view.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band F.

I treat popular accounts as accurate reflections of the research, or I dismiss them all without analysis.

I name one oversimplification but I cannot distinguish oversimplification in media from genuine disagreement among researchers.

I can identify where popular accounts have oversimplified or misrepresented research on a wellbeing claim.

I identify specific oversimplifications or misrepresentations in popular accounts and trace how each diverges from what the underlying research actually shows.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates any aspect of this learning target at Band F.

I refuse to take a position, or I state one without grounding it in specific evidence from my analysis.

I state a position and cite evidence but my position does not engage with the strongest counter-evidence I identified.

I can state my reasoned position on a contested wellbeing-science claim with specific evidence.

I state a position that engages explicitly with the strongest counter-evidence and identifies what weight of evidence would move me to revise.

The student has not produced work that demonstrates applying integrative wellbeing-science understanding to a real decision or situation at Band F.

I describe a decision or situation but do not ground it in specific mechanisms from the stress-emotion-attention-habit system; or I cite mechanisms but do not link them to an observable action I took.

I ground an action in one named mechanism but do not integrate across the system or show how the action addresses more than a single symptom.

I can apply an integrative understanding of the stress-emotion-attention-habit system to a real decision or situation, using specific mechanisms from Bands A–E to justify the action I chose and how it addresses the system rather than a single symptom.

I apply integrative understanding to a real decision, document the action and its effect across the system, and revise the action on the basis of what the system-level response revealed about the mechanisms at play.